Skip to comments.Gingrich is a hero for arguing for “ethical capitalism”
Posted on 01/13/2012 6:14:08 PM PST by VinL
Furthermore, making a profit is only one component of owning a business. Whatever happened to the idea that you are responsible for your workers and to the larger community? Too often, people feel like just pawns in a game of ever increasing largesse for the top dogs. The big shots are always the winners often getting payouts in the millions when their companies fail and the losers are left to figure out how to eat or buy clothes for their children. (A new study found that $100 million golden parachutes have become commonplace for failed CEOs).
Romneys class envy claim is predicated on a lie we often here from the uber-rich and their defenders: the highest goal and achievement for Americans is to be wealthy, when all most people want is to be able to provide a decent lives for their families
The unlikely hero in this tale has been Newt Gingrich, who has been making the most coherent argument for ethical capitalism. Says Gingrich, what we want is, a free enterprise system that is honest. . . fair to everyone and gives everyone an equal opportunity to pursue happiness. Criticizing Romneys brand of free enterprise, (Newt)said, Its not fine if the person who is rich manipulates the system, gets away with all the cash and leaves behind the human beings.
Be still my heart.
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
BS. This charge is repeated in the video. Yet no creditor is ever named in any of these cases.
First of all, if such a creditor existed, then they would be first in line during any subsequent bankruptcy. Second, if a creditor got burned like this, then no one else would ever step forward to lend a Bain firm any money. And third, by its very nature, Bain Capital is the company putting up the money. Hence the word 'Capital'. Get it?
There is no substance to this lie. None. Zip. Nada. Not only that, it doesn't even make sense. So put it to rest.
Of $1.6 Newt netted ~ $100K from one of his businesses, and was scoured for it.
Why not vet Mitt on his net profits.
I was referring to the $1.6 million that he received from FNMA. Did that not occur?
Sorry, there is no room for logic on this thread.
Corruption and greed.
If you’re saying there is nothing wrong with capitalism excpt that it has become corupted, I agree with you completely- so does Newt. That’s what he is saying.
Please, pretty please show me where Newt is advocating that?
Or, is he saying perhaps the character of Romney is what's under the microscope here - character being how you act when no one is forcing you to take either position? Romney's Bain Capital bought companies, issued debt (some would argue while covering up major business risks), used the debt to buy it and its investors out of the acquired company and pay itself lots of fees, then moved on. Too often, the acquired company then folded like a house of cards under the debt load.
Legal? Unless fraud was involved, sure. Moral? If you advocate a beggar-thy-neighbor approach to life, or fall into the atheist Ayn Rand camp, or like to parrot the "it's capitalism, trust us" message of the folks who made their bank this way, sure.
But if you expect the people adversely impacted by this to nod sagely and say, "no worries, Bro, this sort of thing happens in capitalism, and we hope Romney enjoys his nine-figure fortune", well, you're a bloody idiot.
Let me put it another way. Obama was a community organizer - a legal advocation - involved with assembling a constituency to petition for a redress of grievances - Constitutional even! How he did it, why he thought those folks deserved it, and the outcomes he achieved are all highly questionable. Obama got serious power as a result, and I didn't want that type of guy in White House. I don't want the type of guy Romney is in the White House, either.
you ask: “Is there something unethical about capitalism such that it needs to be qualified by the word ethical?”
I ask you: “Is Crony Capitalism ethical?
Ever read this?
Corruption and greed are characteristics of man, not of capitalism.
What he is saying is nonsense, and he knows it. Newt himself is now unethical for intentionally misframing this argument.
Capitalism is what it always was, the tool that drives the freedom of america. It is neutral. We have changed, and to our detriment.
You should have read my other post before you tried to categorize me into agreeing with your candidate, because I do not, nor does Newt agree with me.
This is going to blow up in his face, and it should blow up in his face. We do not need “ethical capitalism” we need ethical leaders, and Newt just proved that he is not one of those.
Only man can be ethical or unethical. Capitalism cannot choose between right and wrong, we can, and we have failed.
Could you destroy a company, lay off 1,000 people, and walk away with $100 million for yourself and your partners? Would you do that? If not, why not? If you would, should you expect those 1,000 folks to vote for you later?
If you expect those folks to vote for you later, do you acknowledge perhaps that you don’t have a firm grasp of reality?
Or, in your mind, do the laid off works disappear in a puff of inky black smoke, never to trouble this world again? I bet Romney REALLY wishes that was the case now that he’s trying to win the nomination.
And if the business owner wants to be clean before The LORD, have a clear conscience and truly be happy he needs to treat others decently including his workers.
Chris, respectfully, your argument is incoherent. Capitalism does not exist without participants. It’s like saying there’s nothing wrong with the game of basketball, it’s the players that screw it up. Well, how can there be basketball without players?
I’m not trying to force any argument on you. Newt is saying that capitalism has been corrupted by a variety of vested interests and those vested interests destroy free markets.
Now, if you disagree with that-its fine. But, if you think “capitalism” exists in present day American, I’m afraid I think you’re mistaken. We are a nanny state socialist nation.
I understand that thinking; however, a Christian is to love his neighbor as himself. In James we read that a Christian is know by how he acts. Therefore, a good man, and a greedy man, will also be known by how he acts, as well.